Jian Hou v. Alejandro N. Mayorkas et al
| Jian Hou |
| Alejandro N. Mayorkas, Ur M. Jaddou and David M. Radel |
| 2:2023cv07805 |
| September 19, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Maria A Audero |
| Dean D Pregerson |
| Other Immigration Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 7, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
ORDER RE JOINT STIPULATION TO STAY CASE PENDING ADJUDICATION OF APPLICATION by Judge Dean D. Pregerson: Having read and considered the Joint Stipulation to Stay Case Pending Adjudication of Application submitted by the parties, and finding good cause therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the instant action shall be stayed until February 19, 2025. (MD JS-6. Case Terminated) (shb)
|
| Filing 11 Joint STIPULATION to Stay Case pending Adjudication of Application filed by defendant Ur M. Jaddou, Alejandro N. Mayorkas, David M. Radel. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Attorney Stephen Finn added to party Ur M. Jaddou(pty:dft), Attorney Stephen Finn added to party Alejandro N. Mayorkas(pty:dft), Attorney Stephen Finn added to party David M. Radel(pty:dft))(Finn, Stephen) |
| Filing 10 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Jian Hou, upon Defendant All Defendants. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the United States Attorneys Office by delivering a copy to Civil Process Clerk. The Attorney Generals Office of the United States was NOT served. Executed upon the officer agency or corporation by delivering a copy to Civil Process Clerk. Service was executed in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Due diligence declaration NOT attached. Registered or certified mail return receipt attached. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Delivery Confirmation)(Chen, Wei) |
|
Filing 9
MINUTE ORDER (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Dean D. Pregerson. This action has been assigned to the calendar of Judge Dean D. Pregerson. Counsel must refer to the Central District's website at "http://www.cacd.uscourts.gov" for Judge Dean D. Pregerson's Procedures and Schedules. Counsel must review the Court's Standing Order and CV Trial Order, and comply with the same. See minute order for details. (lom)
|
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney Oil Appellate on behalf of Defendants Ur M. Jaddou, Alejandro N. Mayorkas, David M. Radel (Attorney Oil Appellate added to party Ur M. Jaddou(pty:dft), Attorney Oil Appellate added to party Alejandro N. Mayorkas(pty:dft), Attorney Oil Appellate added to party David M. Radel(pty:dft))(Appellate, Oil) |
| Filing 7 60 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendants Ur M. Jaddou, Alejandro N. Mayorkas and David M. Radel. (jtil) |
| Filing 6 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (jtil) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Dean D. Pregerson and Magistrate Judge Maria A. Audero. (jtil) |
| Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Jian Hou. (Chen, Wei) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Jian Hou, (Chen, Wei) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Jian Hou. (Chen, Wei) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-36065683 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiff Jian Hou. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A) (Attorney Wei Chen added to party Jian Hou(pty:pla))(Chen, Wei) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
